Kathie Bracy's Blog

A forum for Ohio educators, sharing thoughts regarding their health care and pension system (STRS Ohio). Researcher John Curry manages a clearinghouse of related e-mails, articles, announcements, etc. His daily mailings include many items that do not make it to this blog. Contact John (curryfeezer@yahoo.com) if you wish to be on his e-mail list. Kathie Bracy: kbb47@aol.com.

Friday, July 01, 2011

Happy Birthday, Medicare!

From John Curry, July 1, 2011

45 years ago YESTERDAY, 51% of seniors could either not afford health insurance or were turned down due to pre-existing conditions....

....45 years ago TODAY that nonsense was put to bed......thanks to the passage of the Medicare bill. Of course....most people don't know that, do they? Some even choose not to want to know it, don't they?

John

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MEDICARE!

"Many of us cannot imagine what it was like before Medicare, but back then, the need was clear. Before July 1, 1966, 51 percent of senior citizens were uninsured - unable to find coverage from private insurers who didn't want to cover them. Without health insurance, getting sick or injured could mean going bankrupt, going without needed care or even dying needlessly."

Forty-five years ago today, Medicare began operation and senior citizens started to use their brand new Medicare cards to obtain medical care. As President Lyndon B. Johnson stated, older Americans began to receive guaranteed access to care "not as an act of charity, but as the insured right of a senior citizen. July 1, 1966 marks a new day of freedom for our people."

Many of us cannot imagine what it was like before Medicare, but back then, the need was clear. Before July 1, 1966, 51 percent of senior citizens were uninsured - unable to find coverage from private insurers who didn't want to cover them. Without health insurance, getting sick or injured could mean going bankrupt, going without needed care or even dying needlessly.

President Johnson knew the value of Medicare, but he also knew we would need to work to protect it. "This program is not just a blessing for older Americans," he said. "It is a test for all Americans -- a test of our willingness to work together. In the past, we have always passed that test. I have no doubt about the future."

Today, Medicare provides nearly universal coverage at lower costs than private insurers. Because of Medicare, seniors cannot be denied coverage or charged more. Many of our constituents have told us they are holding on until they can reach age 65 and join Medicare so that they can get the medical care they need but cannot afford on their own.

We are committed to ensuring that Medicare remains in place for this generation and future generations of senior citizens or people with disabilities. We can strengthen it -- just as Medicare has been strengthened over its history and, most recently, by the Affordable Care Act's improved access to preventive services and lower prescription drug costs. But we should never undermine it.

Unfortunately, our national commitment to Medicare is once again being tested. The Republican budget that passed the House last April would end Medicare as we know it and return to the days when senior citizens had to depend on private insurance companies for care. The incoming generation of seniors would be denied the ability to enroll in traditional Medicare. Instead of choosing their own doctor, they'd have to select a private insurance company -- which would then select doctors and decide which treatments they would provide. Private insurers would get a voucher worth only a fraction of the cost of coverage. By 2030, the voucher would cover only 32 percent of the cost of coverage -- leaving seniors to pay 68 percent of premium costs.

The result? According to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, Americans under 55 would face higher out-of-pocket costs once they reach age 65 -- adding $6,000 a year in out-of-pocket spending for the typical senior. That is double the current amount. This is a cost increase they cannot afford, and could force many enrollees to instead go without coverage altogether.

Finally, despite what you may have heard, Americans over 55-years-old -- including those now on Medicare -- would lose, too. The Affordable Care Act's new benefits would be repealed -- immediately leaving seniors to pay for cancer and diabetes screenings, eliminating the annual wellness exams, and increasing out-of-pocket drug cost. Beginning in 2022, no one would be allowed into Medicare, leaving an ever-dwindling number of beneficiaries to pay for higher premiums as Medicare's purchasing power is depleted.

The more the American public knows about the Republican plan, the more they know it fails to meet the needs of seniors and their families. We agree.

So as we celebrate the 45th anniversary of the implementation of Medicare, we recommit ourselves to strengthening and protecting Medicare, now and for generations to come.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

How did your county do in the petition drive? Take a look!

June 30, 2011

Here is a county-by-county breakdown of the signatures gathered to recall SB 5. A big thanks to all of you firemen, policemen, educators, nurses, transit workers, municipal and county workers and other public servants, their families and friends. You have sent a record breaking message to those who are supposed to represent us in Columbus. If they are smart....they will see the handwriting on the wall. If they are not....they won't be reelected.

Note to Senator Shannon Jones (R- Springboro) ...... as the sole sponsor of SB 5 you have awakened a sleeping giant. Your fellow Senators didn't have the courage to sign their names to your SB 5.....open the attachments and you will see 1,298,301 reasons why!(Click images TWICE to enlarge.)..................................................................................

Minutes for the June 16, 2011 CORE Meeting

At 12:25 on Thursday, June 16th, President Dave Parshall opened the Concerned Ohio Retired Educators (CORE) Meeting. After welcoming two new attendees, Mary Lou and Robert Guizzo from Montgomery County, President Parshall had the 12 other attendees introduce themselves.

Mary Ellen Angeletti moved that the minutes from the April CORE meeting (there was no meeting in May) be accepted. George Justice seconded the motion. The members unanimously approved the April minutes.

Carole DePaola presented our treasurer’s report, informing members that bills have been paid and that the CORE bank balance is healthy right now. Treasurer Carole gave the new membership forms she’d acquired to President Dave, who will forward the information to Ryan Holderman.

President Dave explained his SB 5 petition gathering and dispersal of the 30 CORE member petitions. He reported that 27 of the 30 petitions had been mailed back to him; he, in turn, returned those to the OEA, which was thankful for CORE’s help. (Treasurer DePaola has reimbursed him $400 – of the $459 total - for the cost of the mailing effort.)

President Parshall detailed his Express Scripts ordeal, which he plans to write about and put on Kathie Bracy’s blog. Dave’s hope is that his story might help other members avoid some of his troubles. He made a point to praise STRS’ Sandy Knoesel and Greg Nickell for their help in helping him resolve his dilemma.

The meeting adjourned at 12:50. Before we departed, President Dave Parshall reminded the group that the next meeting will be on August 11th.

News from STRS: Contribution change omitted from budget bill; and what you can do to help now

From STRS, June 30, 2011

CONTRIBUTION CHANGE REMAINS OUT OF FINAL BUDGET BILL; ORSC GOING AHEAD WITH STUDY

The legislative conference committee dealing with the state budget did not include a shift in employer/employee contributions for the five statewide pension systems in its final report issued on Monday, June 27. The Ohio Senate then passed the budget bill on June 28, followed by passage in the Ohio House of Representatives on June 29. The bill then went to the governor for his signature.

During the budget discussions, STRS Ohio voiced its concern about the change, advocating that any discussion of contributions should be held within the context of the pension reform legislation proposed by the five Ohio statewide public pension systems. STRS Ohio is grateful for the many STRS Ohio members and constituency groups who also shared this message with members of the Legislature.

Discussions about future pension reform now shift to the Ohio Retirement Study Council (ORSC), the legislative oversight committee for the five pension systems. It is going forward with its plans to issue a request for proposal (RFP) for an independent actuary and policy advisor. According to the RFP, this consultant will be asked to review the systems' proposed pension reform plans, as well as alternative pension plan design changes, retiree health care coverage, pooled purchasing, and individual account options to augment retirees' pensions and health care coverage. It is expected that the process of hiring a consultant, plus the completion of the requested work, will take the project well into the fall.

Committee hearings on House Bill 69 and Senate Bill 3, which were introduced earlier this year to carry pension legislation, will not be resumed until after the ORSC study is done. However, STRS Ohio members are encouraged to keep sharing their opinions with their legislators - particularly on the topic of preserving defined benefit pensions for future retirees versus moving public educators into defined contribution plans.

As STRS Ohio has noted in previous communications, the defined benefit pensions Ohio's public educators earn:

- Save taxpayers billions of additional dollars in potential public assistance expenditures now spent to help individuals whose savings accounts, such as 401(k) plans, do not provide enough to keep them out of poverty in retirement.

- Provide a stable source of revenue, including tax revenue, for Ohio's local economies.

- Are both efficient and economical, as a defined benefit pension can deliver the same retirement income at almost half the cost of a defined contribution savings account due to pooling of investment risk, continual diversification of assets and professional investment management.

With legislators spending more time in their home districts during the summer, STRS Ohio members have an opportunity to talk face-to-face with their representatives and senators about the importance of preserving pensions. Phone calls, letters and e-mails are also effective. Although there is a lag in the pension discussion at the Statehouse, it is still important to stress the importance of changes being approved in a timely manner that preserve pensions for all STRS Ohio members.

Links to additional information relating to the proposed pension legislation are below.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Governor, this is the scene today from the Secretary of State's Office window.....

....where over 1.2 million repeal SB 5 signatures were delivered....did Jon Husted tell you about it after he looked out his window and saw the sight below?

.....and here is a snapshot of just a few of those who will see that your SB 5 will be repealed. You see, messing with teachers and nurses is one thing....messing with firemen and policemen is a whole 'nother ball game! Gov. Walker in Wisconsin was even smart enough to leave the police and firemen out of his anti-collective bargaining bill but you were dumb enough to leave them in, weren't you?

Hey, Governor, are you getting the messages....all 1,298,301 of them?

The coalition leading the effort to repeal Senate Bill 5 will deliver nearly 1.3 million signatures to the secretary of atate today to place Ohio's new collective bargaining law on the November ballot.

A parade of more than 6,000, led by a banner proclaiming the "million signature march," rumbled through Downtown this morning.

We Are Ohio, the group leading the referendum effort, organized the march up Broad Street to Fourth Street, where a semi-truck carrying the 1,298,301 signatures in 1,502 boxes collected will be unloaded. The parade also included retired fire trucks, a drum line, bagpipes and loud motorcycles. It took about 15 minutes to pass.

Secretary of State Jon Husted has a staff of 60 ready to work on the signatures. Meeting the threshold also would stop the law from taking effect until the November election.

As of last week, the group had collected about 714,000 signatures. The previous record for a statewide petition effort: 812,978 for the 2008 measure putting a proposed casino for Clinton County on the ballot. That proposed constitutional amendment was trounced by voters.

Building a Better Ohio, the Republican-based coalition forming to defend Senate Bill 5, is adding current Ohio Senate Republicans' spokesman Jason Mauk as its communications director.

Mauk sent out an email this morning declaring that he is taking a leave of absence from his public job with the Senate to work on the campaign.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Josh, you jerked your webpage, didn't you?

From John Curry, June 28, 2011Monday, the party noted that Mr. Mandel had removed the page even though Mr. Mandel told The Blade last week that the FEC allegation was "baseless." Mr. Mandel was in Toledo Wednesday for a fund-raising event at the Toledo Club.

"Josh Mandel has been campaigning for office on the taxpayers' dime and he was called out. I think this amounts to an admission of wrong-doing," Mr. Barasky said.

I know, someone will be asking, "what does this have to do with STRS?" If they do then they certainly don't have memories from a few years back when Mandel wanted to shove divestiture down our retirees' throats, do they? Josh, being of the Jewish faith, would certainly understand the meaning of "Never Again." Well, Josh, this retiree also says "never again." "Never again" for you to be elected to another public office.

A page in U.S. Senate candidate Josh Mandel's campaign Web site that prompted a complaint to the Federal Elections Commission has been removed, and Democrats are claiming vindication.

Mr. Mandel, the Ohio state treasurer, is raising money to run for the Republican nomination to take on U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat, next year. A Web page that ran on his Treasurer's Office Web site since March 21 summarizing his accomplishments was also on his campaign Web site. Over the weekend, that page disappeared from the campaign Web site.

The Ohio Democratic Party filed a complaint June 6 to the FEC claiming Mr. Mandel is barred by FEC regulations from using material produced by his treasury staff for his campaign. The complaint calls the material an illegal "in-kind" contribution by the state to his campaign.

Monday, the party noted that Mr. Mandel had removed the page even though Mr. Mandel told The Blade last week that the FEC allegation was baseless. Mr. Mandel was in Toledo Wednesday for a fund-raising event at the Toledo Club.

Justin Barasky, spokesman for the Ohio Democratic Party, said Mr. Mandel wouldn't have taken down the disputed material if he didn't think the campaign may have violated campaign finance laws.

"Josh Mandel has been campaigning for office on the taxpayers' dime and he was called out. I think this amounts to an admission of wrong-doing," Mr. Barasky said.

The Mandel campaign said its choice of material for the Web site was not related to the FEC complaint. "Updating our campaign Web site has nothing to do with baseless attacks being lobbed by the Democratic Party in their effort to distract voters from Ohio's job loss under Sherrod Brown's watch," said Anthony Conchel, a consultant and spokesman for Mr. Mandel's still unofficial campaign.

"With the unfortunate news about the worsening economic situation in Ohio and the U.S., over the weekend we added a bunch of new stories about this worsening economic situation in our state because Sherrod Brown's policies have caused massive job loss in Ohio," Mr. Conchel said.

The material in question was titled "Treasurer's Office Update, March 21, 2011." The item listed six things the Treasurer's Office was doing, such as seeking to refinance $3 billion in Ohio debt with low-interest municipal bonds.

The page still appears on Mr. Mandel's Treasurer's Office Web site.

The Democratic Party's complaint alleged that Mr. Mandel's Senate campaign committee took the Web site, e-mail list, and other material from his 2010 state treasurer campaign without compensating the committee as required by the FEC.

Mr. Mandel established a senatorial campaign committee with the FEC in April but has yet to formally announce his Senate candidacy.

Monday, June 27, 2011

One Million Signatures Now Gathered!

That's what sources are telling me the SB 5 repeal petitioners have collected. More than four times the valid 231,000 signatures required to put it on the ballot.

The question is HOW many more? The signature total will be unveiled by WeAreOhio.com at an event in Columbus next Wednesday. Petitions are currently being called in (I dropped my 55 signatures — virtually all sure to be valid — at the North Coast AFL office this morning) and shipped down to Columbus. There will still be people out collecting this weekend, I understand, even though at this point it's just another sugar rose on the icing on the cake. But think of it as just another slight increase in John Kasich's blood pressure.

Now Kasich pretends not to care what happens but he does. He's scared shitless of being publicly humiliated, defied by the voting public, and made to look like the weak little bully he is. That's why he tried to float the idea this week of splitting the referendum into a disjointed bunch of separate measures to confuse voters. Secretary of State Jon Husted, who still apparently cares about the law (to say nothing of his own political future which is deeper in the toilet the closer he's aligned with Kasich), said "no dice."

So — what do you think? HOW many more signatures over a million will we have? An extra hundred thousand? An extra five hundred thousand? What are you predicting? Hey — if you guess the number on the head, I'll send you a nice picture of Ted Strickland, suitable for framing and gazing at as you reflect on how much better off Ohio would be if he had been reelected.

Lest you forget....here are some provisions of SB 5....will they be repealed at the ballot box?

The Repository analyzed how two provisions in Senate Bill 5 that limit public spending on employee health insurance and retirement contributions could affect local governments, libraries and public school districts in Stark County. But Senate Bill 5, which is more than 300 pages, contains many more changes that would affect public employees and agencies — and the taxpayers that support them. Here are other provisions under the bill.

Click image to enlarge.

Bargaining changes: Expands the topics that management can refuse to negotiate, including employee qualifications, work assignments and minimum staffing levels. Teachers also could not negotiate the maximum number of students assigned to their classrooms. Employees still could bargain for wages, hours and terms and conditions of employment and still would be eligible for pay raises based on performance evaluations.

Strikes: Bans employees from striking and requires public employers to deduct an amount equal to twice the employee’s daily rate of pay for each day the employee engaged in a strike. Currently, only certain workers, such as police and firefighters, cannot strike.

Performance pay: Eliminates the state salary scale for teachers that ensures the minimum amount a teacher may be paid is $17,300. Instead, teachers’ pay would be based on performance standards, such as the teacher’s level of license, whether the teacher is considered a “highly qualified teacher” as defined by law, a value-added measure of student performance (such as standardized test scores), teacher evaluations and any other criteria a school board could deem relevant.

Sick leave: Reduces the amount of sick leave most public employees receive from three weeks a year to two weeks.

Vacation leave: Caps vacation leave for certain employees at five weeks a year and limits total accrual for employees who accrue six weeks of vacation time a year.

Union fee: Bans a provision from bargaining agreements that requires employees who do not want to become a union member to pay a fee to the union as a condition of employment.

Contract disputes: Establishes the governing body (city council, school board, township trustees) as the final decision-maker for any contract dispute that is unresolved during the fact-finding process.

Supervisors: Expands the definition of “supervisor” for fire and police departments and prohibits ranking employees in those departments from being part of the same union as rank-and-file employees.

Sunday, June 26, 2011

Some newbies have asked for additional quotes from Wachtmann re. public pension so here they are...and they aren't pretty!

From John Curry, June 26, 2011

Would YOU like to have YOUR Ohio pension based on a 30-year FINAL AVERAGE SALARY? Lynn Wachtmann would....... and said so!John

From John Curry, July 26, 2010Subject: So, what does the good Representative Wachtmann say about your defined benefit public service pension?

"Wachtmann agrees with some of Mayer's sentiments. He said final average salary should be based on a 30-year average, and that the state should move to a defined contribution plan."

And, what do his buddies at the conservative think tank (the Buckeye Institute) think about public servants and their retirements? Well....read this:

"The private sector has long said 'no' to defined benefit plans," said Matt Mayer, head of the Buckeye Institute, a conservative think tank."

"The Buckeye Institute recently released a report calling for deep cuts to public employee pensions to save the state money. The institute calls for elimination of longevity pay, cost-of-living increases, a lower employer contribution, and a move to a 401(k)-like plan. The moves would save $2 billion in the next two-year state budget alone, the report concludes."

Since the average person spends many more years in retirement than in years past, there is a looming question of how to pay for it.

Most private sector employers have responded by dropping the traditional pension plan in favor of a 401(k) system, in addition to Social Security benefits. However, public employees still pay a determined amount into one of Ohio's five public pension funds throughout their working careers. Then they are guaranteed a pension for the rest of their life, the amount based on their earnings and years in public service.

That guarantee comes at a price -- one that cash-poor state and local governments are struggling to pay for. Unless substantial changes aren't made to Ohio's pension systems, the funds will need to come from somewhere. For taxpayers, that could mean fewer government services, higher taxes or both. For retirees, it could mean working longer before they are eligible to retire, and lower payouts when they do.

State law dictates each pension fund should plan for the worst. In the event that government shuts down tomorrow, the funds should be able to pay off all outstanding promises within 30 years.

If a pension fund can't meet that threshold, it must submit a plan to the Legislature on how it will recoup costs.

Two of Ohio's pension funds, which cover public employees and school workers other than educators, meet this benchmark.

The other three, covering Ohio's teachers, police and fire and highway patrol employees, not only are below the threshold, they also have attained "infinity" status. That means they never will be able to pay off their existing obligations unless changes are made.

Given an aging and shrinking work force, increasing costs and a longer life expectancy, retirees will almost certainly get more out of the system than they and their employers pay into it, which means the state is slipping behind. The Ohio Retirement Study Council, made up of legislators and three gubernatorial appointees, asked all funds to come up with a plan to cut costs in coming years.

The pension funds and labor unions are now in agreement on plans that will cut costs down the line, but a battle is looming. The Legislature must approve any changes to the pension funds, and lawmakers have wide-ranging ideas as to what will bring more sustainability to Ohio's pension system.

The wake up call

In 2008, the financial earthquake hit. The stock market crashed and Ohio's pension funds lost billions. PERS, the largest pension fund, lost $24.4 billion, according to the fund's annual report.

There had been talk of pension reform before the crash, but when investments declined, public officials had a greater sense of urgency.

Last year was a better year. PERS made slightly less than half of its losses back.

The pension funds recently got another boost. Earlier this month, three of the state's pension funds reached a $725 million settlement with American International Group Inc., which the state had accused of fraudulent accounting practices and stock price manipulation, which caused the investments to plummet.

Now, the biggest problem facing Ohio's pension systems are an archaic system and "apocalyptic demographics," said Marianne Steger, director of health care and public policy for AFSCME Council 8.

"We never expected someone to retire at 65 and live another 50 years," Steger said.

To make ends meet, Ohio's public employees will need to work longer and contribute more to and expect less from their pension systems.

Public pension system officials have made various recommendations to the General Assembly to fundamentally change how benefits are administered. Officials from two of Ohio's biggest unions, the Ohio Education Association and AFSCME Council 8, said they support their respective systems' recommendations.

Three of the systems are recommending increased contributions from employees and taxpayers, although this recommendation is not likely to go over well in the Legislature. That's assuming the proposal even makes it into proposed legislation at all -- the lawmaker drafting the bill said he has reservations about contribution hikes.

All are asking that workers spend more time in public service. The Public Employees Retirement System wants to raise the normal retirement age to 67, or require that employees spend 32 years in public service.

Currently, an employee's pension is based on his or her highest paid years in public service. All pension systems want to change this to five years to better reflect a worker's salary throughout his or her career.

Retirees collecting pensions also get a 3 percent annual cost-of-living increase. All but one pension fund wants to either defer or lower this guarantee.

Chris DeRose, executive director of PERS, said his system's recommendations were made after consulting with a number of stakeholders, including retirees and labor unions.

He and Steger are involved in campaigns to explain the changes to their members. Both say members have questions about the proposals, but they generally accept the proposals once they see the need.

Bill Leibensperger, vice president of the Ohio Education Association, said he has faced challenges explaining to his members why the State Teachers' Retirement System must be fixed.

"We have to recognize the hard facts that real changes need to be made to preserve the system," he said. "In STRS we will have to work longer, pay more, and get less."

The hard truth

By law, Ohio must pay the promised retirement benefits for all employees.

However, the state does not have to provide retirees with health care, although all five pension systems do. This means if public pension funds start to run out of money, health care for retirees could be the first to go.

PERS currently has the assets to fund health care for 11 years.

The threat that retiree health care could go is the wake-up call some need to agree to the changes, DeRose said.

"We get strong feedback on the changes after explaining the need, that by making these changes we can continue to fund health care," DeRose said.

Right now the recommendations are being reviewed by the General Assembly's Retirement Study Council, chaired by Rep. Todd Book, D-McDermott.

Book could not go into detail about what will be included in the bill. However, he did say he has strong reservations about any proposal to increase employer contributions. The teachers, police and fire and highway patrol pension funds are seeking such increases.

Retirement council members Reps. Lynn Wachtmann, R-Napoleon, and Dan Dodd, D-Hebron, were more candid. Wachtmann said he would oppose any measure that will increase employer contributions. Dodd said he would use it only as a last resort.

Pensions, Wachtmann said, already are strangling local government budgets.

Dodd said he is also concerned about the formula for determining payments. Under the current system, a retiree's pension is based on the top three highest paid years. There is concern that some employees are loading up on overtime as they approach retirement so they can collect a higher pension. This "spiking" is legal but can add hundreds of thousands to a retiree's total pension payments.

Four of the five funds are recommending the average needs to be taken over the highest five years.

"The retirement needs to reflect the salary you were making," Dodd said.

Sen. Sue Morano, D-Lorain, also a member of the council, said another X-factor in the debate is how the new federal health care law will impact Ohio's public employees and retirees.

The opposition

Pooled pension plans used to be common in the private sector, but they were abandoned in favor of defined contribution plans, such as a 401(k).

Some conservatives are saying public employee retirement should mirror the private sector.

"The private sector has long said 'no' to defined benefit plans," said Matt Mayer, head of the Buckeye Institute, a conservative think tank.

The Buckeye Institute recently released a report calling for deep cuts to public employee pensions to save the state money. The institute calls for elimination of longevity pay, cost-of-living increases, a lower employer contribution, and a move to a 401(k)-like plan. The moves would save $2 billion in the next two-year state budget alone, the report concludes.

In Mayer's opinion, the proposed changes by the retirement system don't nearly go far enough, and he doesn't see the political will to do more in the Legislature.

"Politicians always do this nibbling on the margins to not address the real problem," Mayer said.

Wachtmann agrees with some of Mayer's sentiments. He said final average salary should be based on a 30-year average, and that the state should move to a defined contribution plan.

In California, a referendum campaign is under way to cut pension benefits.

"Taxpayers are starting to wake up to the (pension) issue," Wachtmann said. "Doing nothing could cause a couple people to fund a referendum, though I have not heard of an effort."

The Buckeye Institute's conclusion is that Ohio public employees' actual compensation is much higher than those in the private sector. However, a competing study says otherwise.

The National Institute on Retirement Security released a report this April also comparing public sector employment to private sector employment on a national scale. Its conclusion? Public employees do get better benefits, however their base pay is much lower, evening things out.

"Although the current recession calls for equal sacrifice, the long-term pattern indicates that state and local workers are not, on average, overcompensated," the study concludes.

Governor....welcome to the Law of Unintended Consequences!

From John Curry, June 26, 2011

"So, instead of taking pressure off the state pension funds who had been battered by the collapse on Wall Street that start with Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy by reducing benefits, Kasich’s proposals have actually put a more immediate strain on them as employees flock to retire en masse before Governor Kasich’s “austerity” measures can take effect."

What happens when you spend much of your first year in office waging war against public employee’s retirement benefits? Well, anecdotally, the Columbus Dispatch reports this morning you see a massive spike in retirements in the public sector as employees who were already eligible for retirement decide its better to retire now and get the benefits you were promised than risk what Governor Kasich and the GOP legislature is considering taking away.

So, instead of taking pressure off the state pension funds who had been battered by the collapse on Wall Street that start with Lehman Brothers’ bankruptcy by reducing benefits, Kasich’s proposals have actually put a more immediate strain on them as employees flock to retire en masse before Governor Kasich’s “austerity” measures can take effect.

It’s called the “Law of Unintended Consequences,” Governor.

(Click image to enlarge)

Some of this can be attributed to just plain old demographics. After all the prior records of retirements was from 2008-2010, depending on the pension fund (except for the Patrol.) There’s obviously going to be a spike as the Baby Boomer generation is entering into retirement age. But there seems to be little dispute that John Kasich has accelerated it, which, of course, operates to undermine the effectiveness of his pension changes in the first place.

Rep. Lynn Wachtmann, a Napoleon Republican who also sits on the Ohio Retirement Study Council, dismissed as outdated the argument that government employees deserve better retirement packages than their private-sector peers because they receive less pay. "The taxpayers of Ohio, who are footing the bill for all of this in the end, need to realize how generous the public-pension systems - all of them - are compared to private-sector retirement plans," he said. "Most of our private-sector employers would go bankrupt if they had to pay the kind of money into employee retirements that our public-sector employers do."

Now do you remember? You know....... the same guy who sponsored a bill to ensure that bottled water (and not some other competing beverages like soda) would be sold in all of Ohio's public schools? You might want to see his latest conflict of interest. Here it is...in the form of an editorial from today's Toledo Blade. Looks like Lynn is looking out for his personal interests once again, doesn't it?JohnP.S. - The bottled water article re. another of Lynn's conflicts of interest follows today's Blade article.P.S. 2 Those folks in the Toledo area really are protective of "their" lake...can you blame them? After all......it's our lake also!

'The sponsor of the House bill, state Rep. Lynn Wachtmann (R., Napoleon), insists it appropriately balances environmental protection with “the cost of doing business.” Mr. Wachtmann, who owns a company that draws water from the Lake Erie watershed, calls opponents of his legislation “fear-mongering” alarmists who would rather watch manufacturing plants close than allow them “insignificant” withdrawals.'

How's this for a winning strategy to create jobs and promote economic growth in Ohio?

Risk dangerously low water levels and quality in Lake Erie — the shallowest of the Great Lakes — and its tributaries. Jeopardize the $10 billion a year in revenue, the 250,000 jobs, and the tourism, boating, fishing, and recreational industries that the lake contributes to the Ohio economy.

Aggravate pollution — including toxic algae blooms — in Lake Erie and the rivers and streams that feed it. Threaten the supply of drinking water for 3 million Ohioans.

Shift costs for water and wastewater treatment from big businesses to smaller businesses and consumers. Defy the spirit, and probably the letter, of the Great Lakes Compact, an agreement by eight states, Congress, and Canada to protect the lakes from excessive withdrawals and manage them wisely for future generations.

A bill rammed through the state House last week on a party-line vote, and similarly fast-tracked for Senate passage this week, would allow businesses to withdraw as much as 5 million gallons of water a day from Lake Erie without even getting a state permit. No other Great Lakes state has such a high threshold for regulation of water use; under Ohio’s current limit of 2 million gallons, more water already is withdrawn from Lake Erie than any of the other Great Lakes.

The measure also authorizes unregulated withdrawals of 2 million gallons a day from inland streams and rivers in the watershed, and 300,000 gallons from small, high-quality streams. It seems likely that corporate-friendly state regulators would not balk at business requests for even greater withdrawals.

The sponsor of the House bill, state Rep. Lynn Wachtmann (R., Napoleon), insists it appropriately balances environmental protection with “the cost of doing business.” Mr. Wachtmann, who owns a company that draws water from the Lake Erie watershed, calls opponents of his legislation “fear-mongering” alarmists who would rather watch manufacturing plants close than allow them “insignificant” withdrawals.

Actual environmentalists and scientists say the bill lacks overall water-conservation guidelines and seeks to isolate Lake Erie from broader management of the Great Lakes basin — a violation of the compact’s regional emphasis. That approach, the Ohio Environmental Council argues, “leaves Ohio vulnerable to litigation by not upholding our binding contract with the other seven Great Lakes states ... a waste of precious and scarce taxpayer dollars.”

There’s a better alternative. A measure sponsored by state Rep. Dennis Murray (D., Sandusky) would regulate water withdrawals on the basis of science, not lobbyists’ preferences or lawmakers’ efforts to make up numbers as they go along. Other states, including Michigan, have done that.

But the legislative majority here isn’t interested. House members also brushed aside proposed amendments to the GOP bill that would have created the nuisance of public review of the legislation’s effects.

Former Republican Gov. Bob Taft, a leader in developing the Great Lakes Compact, says the water bill goes too far. Former GOP Sen. George Voinovich has asked the Senate to postpone its vote. But don’t worry: If lake levels get low enough, it might become easier for oil and natural-gas operators to drill in Lake Erie — something else GOP lawmakers have shown they don’t feel compelled to prevent.

The water-withdrawal bill seems likely to become law because, for now, Republicans have the votes to do pretty much whatever they want. That may not always be the case, if the Ohioans who hired the politicians responsible for this and other extremist legislation are paying attention.

The purpose of HB 373 is “to establish nutritional standards for certain foods and beverages sold in public and chartered nonpublic schools”. It also covers other stuff like body mass index testing and physical fitness requirements but for the purposes of this post the part about food and beverages is what’s important.

Also important (from his bio) is that Wachtmann is the “president of Maumee Valley Bottling, Inc. and a partner in Culligan Water Conditioning”. He’s also on the Board of Directors for the International Bottled Water Association.

Can you see what’s coming next?

Here’s part of the bill:

Sec. 3313.816. (A) No public or chartered nonpublic school shall permit the sale of a la carte beverage items other than the following during the regular and extended school day:

(1) For a school in which the majority of grades offered are in the range from kindergarten to grade four:(a) Water;(b)(i) Prior to January 1, 2014, eight ounces or less of low-fat or fat-free milk, including flavored milk, that contains not more than one hundred seventy calories per eight ounces;(ii) Beginning January 1, 2014, eight ounces or less of low-fat or fat-free milk, including flavored milk, that contains not more than one hundred fifty calories per eight ounces.(c) Eight ounces or less of one hundred per cent fruit juice, or a one hundred per cent fruit juice and water blend with no added sweeteners, that contains not more than one hundred sixty calories per eight ounces.

Yep, that’s right. Rep. Lynn Wachtmann, president of a company that sells bottled water, wrote legislation that requires every school in Ohio to sell water and forbids schools from selling competing beverages like soda.

Man if THAT isn’t the definition of conflict of interest I don’t know what is.

About Me

A graduate of the Oberlin Conservatory of Music and the Baylor University School of Music, I am a professional symphony musician by background. I am also a retired elementary classroom teacher (nonmusic), having taught in the Alliance (OH) City Schools 2-1/2 years and the Columbus Public Schools 30 years. My first job was as harp instructor at The University of Texas; currently I am a Lecturer in Harp at The University of Mount Union. As a retired educator and a life member of a number of professional organizations, including the Ohio Retired Teachers Association and the Ohio Education Association-Retired, I also worked through CORE (Concerned Ohio Retired Educators, which officially disbanded 9/20/12) to help bring about badly needed reform in our teachers retirement system, STRS Ohio. My e-mail: kbb47@aol.com.